Paying trolls to skew the discussion is a growing trend today in the food industry as the organic food movement grows and the GMO labeling debate hits ballot boxes all over U.S.  The Intercept, a website organized by Glenn Greenwald, Laura Poitras, and Jeremy Scahill that reports on documents leaked by NSA whistleblower, Edward Snowden, has published some of these documents – including instructions on how to be an Internet troll for corporate purposes. In 2013, Snowden, a former contractor for the NSA, leaked classified documents from the NSA to the general public. Greenwald worked with Snowden and the documents to create articles based on the information they discovered, many of which, are published on the website. Snowden claims his purpose is to inform the public about issues he believes should not be classified, but the debate rages on as to whether he is a hero or a traitor as the U.S. government seeks to capture and prosecute him.

These techniques have not only been highly researched, but manuals have been created to teach them. In February, Greenwald wrote an article entitled “How Covert Agents Infiltrate the Internet to Manipulate, Deceive, and Destroy Reputations.” The article shows detailed directions from manuals on how to discredit a person or company, and includes even more destructive practices, like leaking information, emailing colleagues, neighbors and friends, and changing photos on their social media. As chilling as it sounds, using Internet trolls to distort and reshape the conversation on food is happening all over the web today.


As a parent, you may read a lot of blog post about unsafe foods, questionable practices by the FDA, or the effort to label GMOs. On some of these articles, you see a series of detailed comments that seem to logically question the issue at hand. These comments are sometimes respectful but often demeaning, and frequently contain links to official articles and resources that counter the author’s position. As a reader, you begin to wonder if the author, while having the best intentions, may have been duped by conspiracy theories and should not have written the article.

The problem is that perhaps you are the one being duped into believing that this is a neutral commenter. In reality, this person may have been paid by a company or organization to “take down” the author. A new era has arisen in which writers, commenters and truth seekers are being debated by hired hands whose sole purpose is to destroy the reputation and credibility of those with opposing points of view.


These Internet trolls use a number of different tactics in order to keep pressure on thought leaders, journalists and bloggers when they question corporate practices and government agencies to destroy consumer trust in these articles. These techniques include:

  1. Spreading false or skewed information in online conversations, including social media and blog comments. Lies of omission are another popular technique here as well.
  2. Creating false accounts that follow food industry leaders and then generally acting unhinged as a follower of the author, in order to scare followers away.
  3. Agreeing with the article while displaying unstable or outrageous behavior in the comments so that real readers and commenters are scared away from following him or her.
  4. Creating multiple accounts to make it look like there are more dissenters than there actually are. Usually, the same person or group creates them all. Someone who is very skilled will vary the “voice” of the commenters so that they sound like different people who coincidentally just met and all agree.
  5. Organized, timed attacks to ruin a person’s livelihood or reputation. These can be timed with the victim’s own successes: a new commercial, a book release, a site launch, a conference, etc.
  6. Posting comments that claim “I am a victim of this thinking!” with details on how the author’s point of view on a topic has destroyed their lives when, in fact, these are just made up stories. Many times, the commenter will look like your average person, or a typical middle class parent.


In June, Truth Stream Media published “Self-proclaimed Monsanto employee trolling anti-GMO articles, claiming organic food ‘kills people’,” which outlines the commenting tactic used on Heather Callaghan’s article, “Monsanto Teaching a Health Class In a School Near You?” published at Activist Post. Here is what the commenter posted:

blog comments

As we can see, the commenter uses several tactics. First, he accuses the author of hate, and then he paints Monsanto as good guys. He tries to demolish the author’s credibility by accusing her of not understanding the facts and mocking her. Finally, he wraps his argument with an unsupported suggestion that organics kill, and then demeans the audience by calling them stupid to have read the story. He does not go any further, perhaps because the audience at Activist Post is not going to be convinced. He is simply “seeding” some negative commentary to build up a resource against the author in general.


Large-scale government organizations and corporations, like Big Agriculture (Monsanto, for example), are some of the groups behind these Internet trolls. What is their end goal? They have a few things in mind:

  1. Often, they seek to publicly destroy the entire reputation of the person who is trying to educate the masses. This allows them to decry that person as a fraud and to shame anyone who follows or trusts him or her. Parents trying to do the best for their family can get scared away.
  2. If they can’t achieve that, they can cast doubt among the followers and perhaps even turn some of those followers away from the truth. If they’re lucky, they will get followers or readers to feel like they’ve been duped and enrage them enough to switch sides and become their own spokespersons, such as recruiting unwitting parenting bloggers to support their agenda.
  3. If all goes according to plan, they can start an “anti” movement, with its own momentum as former followers and uncertain doubters decry the lack of “truth” in causes such as GMO Labeling and the organic food movement.


According to people who actually do this for a living, a low level troll can make $200 – $300 per month for 2-3 hours of work a week once they develop a routine. Higher ups have been rumored to pull in over a $1000 a month, and get perks ranging from paid vacations to event tickets. They are also required to sign confidentiality agreements, allowing the companies behind them to remain hidden.


So how can you sort out the truth? There are a few things you can do to protect yourself.

  1. For starters, I would avoid reading comments until you know how to spot a troll. If the comment uses one of the techniques I’ve outlined above, be wary of anything that person has to say. The problem here is that this tactic can work both ways, and it takes a lot of experience as well as knowledge of who the leaders are in this community to sort the trolls from the honest comments.
  2. Secondly, know the sources you are reading. Who is the author? What is their background and education? Is their body of work consistent or are they fostering an agenda? I used to follow a certain alternative health resource, until one day it posted a very long and angry article about gun policies. For me, that shot the editors’ credibility as it was clear they had a political agenda, rather than seeking to uncover the truth.
  3. What sort of research and testing have they done on this topic and does it make sense? If you’re not into science, this may be a challenge, but start looking for other sources that agree with the author and discover what is behind them. You’d be surprised how often a reputable university backs up or is the source of research behind a controversial topic.
  4. What about their personal experiences? I’ve discovered that for me, many authors who were on one side of the fence and now on the other (for example, a former Monsanto employee who is now opposed to GMOs) are very credible, since they’ve seen up close and personal what a company is doing or how it has harmed people – or themselves.
  5. If a comment sounds illogical, that should be a red flag, such as “organics kill,” an idea that has no basis in science. I would immediately discredit that commenter.

Internet trolls are not just annoying people that are difficult to deal with. They can often be paid contractors or employees whose purpose is to unfairly shift the conversation to an organization’s advantage. They are dangerous corporate shills who ruin lives, careers and reputations based on falsehoods and half-truths. They are gaming your opinion to achieve their own profit motives at the expense of your right to know the truth. Most importantly, they are trying to get you to doubt your own knowledge to stop making the safe food choices you are working to make for your family and abandon the fight to promote clean, healthy foods.

Don’t give into to these Internet trolls. Keep yourself and your family safe with the tips above, and keep eating healthy!


Compassion Education – Telling the Truth


We require children to recite the Pledge of Allegiance for “liberty and justice for all.” We teach kids that Abraham Lincoln, in sum, freed the slaves. We ensure that every child can recognize the icon of Martin Luther King, Jr., and summarize his achievements in one sentence—and then we take the day off in celebration of his life.

We tell kids that it only takes one person to change the world, but we don’t tell them how it can be done.

Our promises are empty: the nod we give to achievements in social justice is void of substantive wisdom.

Why go through the motions at all if not to relay lessons of significance? It is not that children are too young to learn the why’s and how’s of social change. They are capable of much more than our culture gives them credit for. We leave out the grittier details behind achievements in social justice because we collectively believe that children should be sheltered from the “adult” world.

Without much thought, we accept a concept of childhood that sees children as fragile beings who require being kept ignorant of many basic realities. But there is no universally accepted concept of childhood. Notions of what is and isn’t appropriate for children vary throughout history and the world. Kids are more competent and sturdy than we think. When we sugarcoat, oversimplify, or avoid truths, we hinder what our children are capable of, psychologically, spiritually, and morally. We hinder our progress as a society.

The path to a more sustainable and socially just future lies in bravely engaging our children in new ways of thinking and living—even if the topics are challenging. Kids must know what’s at stake, they must understand the power of the individual in a substantive manner, and they must be aware of how, specifically, they can help change the world.

A vegan education (there’s no better curriculum encompassing environmental, health, and humane education) starts where kids are already interested—with animals—and leads to the kind of life-centered worldview critical to sustainable innovations and environmental and social policies. Think how the future of business, industry, and politics would look with such systemic thinkers at the helm.

In my experience, the resistance to the notion of a vegan education is more about adults’ unwillingness to change than it is about kids’ abilities to learn.

When my second children’s book, Vegan Is Love, was released in 2012, major media outlets picked up the news. Not in celebration of a new resource for a new generation of compassionate kids, but because inviting children into an honest dialogue about meat and dairy products was being deemed outrageous and controversial—after all, most parents avoid the day their kid realizes that chicken nuggets do not, in fact, grow on trees. My book threatened to make kids more aware than was comfortable for adults.

While a slew of media talking heads judged Vegan Is Love to be propaganda, dangerous, brainwashing, and even child abuse, vegan families—who have all along been engaging in the work of social change—had a good laugh. After a child psychologist on television called Vegan Is Love “the most disturbing children’s book” he’d ever seen, I received a note from a 10-year-old vegan girl who had seen the segment and asked, “Why is that expert so ignorant?” An even younger girl threw her hands in the air and asked me, “What’s so scary about your book? It just tells the truth!”

Grownups were having a hard time with the concept of social change toward a life-centered, compassionate worldview, while children were understanding it easily.

“Children don’t know the full story!” these skeptical adults argued. “Kids don’t know about nutrient deficiencies or human history or food production or costs! They just want to be nice to animals!”

Precisely. Where better to begin an exploration of the world’s unknowns than from a place of compassion and a sense of justice?

With animals as the centerpiece, my books address how even the youngest of children can put their love into action—through healthy food and cruelty-free choices that protect our bodies, the environment, and all living beings. I cover the emotional lives of animals—the why’s behind veganism—and our choices, the how’s of a compassionate lifestyleThey are picture books, but at their core, my books are about democracy, supply and demand, and engaging ourselves in the public realm. We can give kids this education—and it is one that lasts a lifetime.

To this day, I have never known any child to be overwhelmed by discovering the motives behind veganism—only adults. In this way, the media outrage over Vegan Is Love revealed the invisible forces that shape public thinking about children, food, health, and animals—hindering our growth toward a more sustainable and just world. If the public were aware of the level of disease and abuse caused by eating animals, the outrage would be directed at the pervasive cultural programming, not at a children’s book about choices alternative to the status quo.

Corporations are well aware of the importance of marketing to kids in order to increase profits. But neither our educational systems, nor parenting magazines, nor children’s literature takes the intelligence and abilities of kids seriously enough to help empower them to create substantive social change. Engaging kids is not just good for business—it’s good for a sustainable and just future.



How Many Slaves Work For You?

Since product transparency is basically non existing it is very hard to know if the products you are buying and the brands you are trusting use slave labor at any time of the production of a certain item.

Again it is up to the consumer to ask questions, demand answers and to chose if they want to be a part of this. As long as there are customers and no demands for change, a profitable company will keep on doing what the consumer wants/buys.


How Many Slaves Work For You?


Youtube video clip:


Statistics from a U.S. government study are helping trace common consumer products back to slave-labour origins. Findings released in the 2011 report from the U.S. Department of Labour outline 71 countries involved in exploitative labour practices, spanning 130 product types. The National Post graphics department takes a look at this data and charts out what it means:




Slavery Footprint - how many slaves work for you